This document contains an answer and counterclaims filed by Defendant Pablo M. de Ocampo in response to a forcible entry case brought against him by 13 Plaintiffs. De Ocampo denies many of the Plaintiffs' allegations. He claims the Plaintiffs are not the legitimate heirs of Gregorio Mendoza and excludes two legitimate heirs. De Ocampo seeks dismissal of the case and claims moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees from the Plaintiffs for filing a malicious and unjustified case against him. He asks the court to rule in his favor after trial.
This document contains an answer and counterclaims filed by Defendant Pablo M. de Ocampo in response to a forcible entry case brought against him by 13 Plaintiffs. De Ocampo denies many of the Plaintiffs' allegations. He claims the Plaintiffs are not the legitimate heirs of Gregorio Mendoza and excludes two legitimate heirs. De Ocampo seeks dismissal of the case and claims moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees from the Plaintiffs for filing a malicious and unjustified case against him. He asks the court to rule in his favor after trial.
This document contains an answer and counterclaims filed by Defendant Pablo M. de Ocampo in response to a forcible entry case brought against him by 13 Plaintiffs. De Ocampo denies many of the Plaintiffs' allegations. He claims the Plaintiffs are not the legitimate heirs of Gregorio Mendoza and excludes two legitimate heirs. De Ocampo seeks dismissal of the case and claims moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees from the Plaintiffs for filing a malicious and unjustified case against him. He asks the court to rule in his favor after trial.
This document contains an answer and counterclaims filed by Defendant Pablo M. de Ocampo in response to a forcible entry case brought against him by 13 Plaintiffs. De Ocampo denies many of the Plaintiffs' allegations. He claims the Plaintiffs are not the legitimate heirs of Gregorio Mendoza and excludes two legitimate heirs. De Ocampo seeks dismissal of the case and claims moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees from the Plaintiffs for filing a malicious and unjustified case against him. He asks the court to rule in his favor after trial.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 5
Republic of the Philippines
IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT OF VICTORIA
Fourth Judicial Region Victoria, Oriental Mindoro LEOPOLDO MAGRAMO, RAMON DENNIS MOSQUERA, RICKY M. LARDIZABAL, JHOBERT MOSQUERA, EMALYN MOSQUERA, JOREMEL MORQUERA, ELINO M. MENDOZA, ROSALINA M. CASAPAO, EDNALYN M. BENDIOLA ( Attorney in Fact), For and in behalf of herself and co-owners, Plaintiffs, Civ il Case No. 15-480 - versus Brgy. Captain PABLO M. DE OCAMPO ENTRY Defendant, x-----------------x
FORCIBLE
ANSWER
WITH COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS
THE DEFENDANT PABLO M. DE OCAMPO, by counsel and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully states and avers that: 1. Defendant deny the allegations contained in paragraphs 1, 2,5, 6 and 10 of the Complaint for lack of sufficient knowledge to form a conclusion as to the truth of the same; 2. Insofar as paragraphs 7 and 8 are concerned, the same is denied because it was not the Respondent who conducted the project but rather the Provincial Government of Oriental Mindoro. Attached herewith are the pictures of the project during its construction as Annex 1. Also the Respondent asked a legitimate heir of the project in the person of Mrs. Victoria M. Magsino, legitimate daughter of GREGORIO MENDOZA to have the project constructed in the subject lot. Herein attached as Annex 2 is the Kasunduan ng pagbibigay pahintulot signed by Mrs. Magsino and the Defendant. In turn, the Defendant, having given the authority by a legitimate daughter of Gregorio Mendoza, facilitated the project being implemented by the Provincial Government of Oriental Mindoro. Also, it is but a lie that no resolution was passed by the Sangguniang Barangay in relation to the said project. Attached herewith as Annexes 3 and 4 are the resolutions passed by the Sangguniang Barangay in relation to the said project; 3. Noteworthy also is the allegation in paragraph 4 wherein the Plaintiffs claimed to be the legitimate heirs of Gregorio Mendoza. Defendant has personal knowledge that they are all illegitimate children of Gerogorio Mendoza. Thus, they are lying and not truthful to their statement. In fact, in their Extra-Judicial Settlement of Estate and Special Power of Attorney, they never included Victoria Magsino and the heirs of the latters brother, Julio, in the said settlement. Victoria
Page 2 of 5
and the late Julio are the only legitimate children of Gregorio. Thus the same is denied; 4. Defendant admits paragraph 3 insofar as his name and address; 5. Paragraph 9 is also admitted but only as to fact that no compromise has yet been agreed upon. Attached herewith is a copy of the letter of the Defendant to the Community Environment and Natural Resources Office to help him settle this matter as Annex 5. In fact on 13 July 2015, there was a meeting with some of the Plaintiffs who demanded a 40% royalty on the income of the project with the CENRO as mediator. But the Defendant explained that the water supply is not an income generating project but a public service project. There was also a meeting before the Office of the Municipal Local Government Operations Officer of Victoria, Oriental Mindoro in relation to this issue. In short, actions were taken but no compromise was yet to be agreed upon; 6. It is the thesis of the Defendant that this case should be dismissed for the following reasons to wit; 6.1. Plaintiffs failed to establish the fact that force, stealth, intimidation and strategy was employed by the Defendant in allegedly depriving them of their alleged property; 6.2. Plaintiffs were not able to show their rights over the property. It is by fact and truth that they are all illegitimate children of the late Gregorio Mendoza who still has a pending application for homestead. Thus, the ownership of their father on the said land nor his rights thereof are still unsettled. Another factor that made their claim dubious is the fact that they never included the two legitimate heirs of Gregorio Mendoza in the settlement of estate which renders the same not effective; and 6.3. Plaintiffs failed to show that they are in physical possession of the property. Note should be taken by the fact that they are not residing in the lot in question. Another matter worth looking at is that they have not even show their right over the property aside from a sweeping and general claim that they are heirs of the deceased Gregorio Mendoza who only has a pending application for homestead. Plaintiffs should be admonished given the fact that they excluded the legitimate heirs of the late Gregorio Mendoza in their settlement of the estate of the latter.
AS COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS 7. Defendant hereby restates and repleads all the allegations in the preceding paragraphs by way of reference and incorporation; 8. As a consequence of the malicious and wrongful filing of this entirely baseless and unjustified action, which is attended by extreme bad faith, lies and deception, the Defendant, and her family had suffered sleepless nights, mental anguish, serious anxiety, severe stress,
Page 3 of 5
wounded feelings, besmirched reputation and social humiliation
considering that the Defendant is a sitting government official, for which Plaintiffs should be made liable for moral damages in the total amount of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P100,000.00); 9. In instituting this unwarranted and clearly unfounded suit against the Defendant, Plaintiff had acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless and malevolent manner and, by way of example or correction for the public good, Plaintiffs should be made liable to pay Defendant exemplary damages in the total amount of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P100,000.00); 10. As a further consequence of the malicious and wrongful filing of the present action, Defendant was constrained to hire the services of counsel for a legal fee of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00), plus THREE THOUSAND PESOS (P3,000.00) per court appearance, and to incur expenses of litigation for which plaintiff should be made to pay.
PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most respectfully prayed that after hearing on the merits, this Honorable Court issue an Order: 1. Dismissing the Complaint in toto for utter lack of merit after trial on the merits or motu propio; 2. Granting moral damages in favor of the Defendant in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00); 3. Granting exemplary damages in favor of the Defendant in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00);; 4. Granting defendant's claim for attorney's fees in the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00), plus THREE THOUSAND PESOS (P3,000.00) per court appearance and expenses of litigation as may be proved during trial. Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for. 24 August 2015, Calapan City for Victoria, Oriental Mindoro,Philippines.
ATTY. HOSPICIO I. LAYGO, JR.
Counsel for the Defendant IBP No. 956825/01-05-15-Oriental Mindoro PTR No. 6094114/01-05-15-Calapan City Roll of Attorneys No. 59679 MCLE Compliance No. IV-0018669, April 18, 2013 330 Encarnacion St., Camilmil Calapan City, Oriental Mindoro 09204024716 (043) 286 7616 [email protected]
Page 4 of 5
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES) Province of Oriental Mindoro) S.S. City of Calapan) x-----------------------x
I, PABLO M. DE OCAMPO, of legal age, Filipino, married, and a
resident of Brgy. Antonino, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro, Philippines, after being sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and certify that: That I am the Defendant in the above-entitled case; That I have caused the preparation of the above Answer with Compulsory Counterclaims and I have read the same and knows the contents thereof; That the allegations contained therein are true and correct of my own personal knowledge. (a) I have not theretofore commenced any other action or proceeding or filed any claim involving the same issues or matter in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of my knowledge, (b)no such action or proceeding is pending therein; (c) if I should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or quasi-judicial agency, I undertake to report such fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court or agency wherein the original pleading and sworn certification contemplated herein have been filed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto _____________ at Calapan City, Philippines.
set my hand this
PABLO M. DE OCAMPO Affiant SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this _____________, by affiant who is personally known to me.
Doc. No. ______;
Page No. ______; Book No. ______; Series of ______; COPY FURNISHED: ATTY. HARVEY ECKER ZAMORA Counsel for the Plaintiffs
Page 5 of 5 Public Attorneys Office Capitol Compound, Calapan City Oriental Mindoro
